Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Adleza

Regulars
  • Posts

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Adleza

  1. So I have been away for a while, missed these forums. I'm typing from a hospital computer. I think this God thing is addictive. The prayer habit is strong . Even so, I'm feeling more stable and more whole, and am begining to see that praying- asking for something, whether it is help, general guidance, an object, whatever- is potentially dangerous. Asking a god for something removes the responsibility, even the possibility of achieving it yourself. If you fail, a god can be a scapegoat, in the same manner. This distorts reality in a serious way, renders the individual helpless in their own minds. That's so screwed up it gives me the creeps. About a week ago, my boyfriend of 5 years started having abdominal pains, suffered for a couple days, and I finally dragged him to the hospital. (He will be fine, but it was terrifying for a few days even after we got here.) When I decided he was going to the hospital, manly pride or no, was when the destructive power of prayer really hit me. The habit thing to do would be to pray that he feel better. Since we aren't completely gone, he would have eventually got to the hospital, but allowing ourselves to remain helpless (through handing control to an imaginary being) would have prolonged the time that we stayed at home (I don't know by how much). To be honest, I felt VERY helpless. My 'other half' was suffering, I could do absolutely nothing to help him (I thought). Again, my first reaction when I feel helpless is to pray for strength, guidence, etc., but without prayer I had two choices. Sit and do nothing while he lay on the floor in pain, or figure out something to do. Obviously the first choice is not really even one to consider. So I figured out something I could do (take him to the hospital whether that made him feel wimpy or not). Once I made the decision to kick myself and use my rational brain, it was a rapid, obvious choice, and only possible in a timely manner because I HAD TO take responsibility for my own actions. Brilliant. I love you guys. Another day and he would have been in intensive care, not bored and getting better in the normal hospital wing.
  2. Thanks for all your input- been away for a while. I think for now I will just stick to talking with him without any mention of a particular philosophy. Try to appeal to his intellgence- I think it will be easier without presenting discussion as a particular thing. Also that way if he talks to my dad about any of it, my dad will be very hesitant to say to my brother that I am stupid (he'd be quick to label Ayn Rand or Objectivism as evil). As far as Heinlein, strangely enough my dad has been pushing Heinlein on my brother (and did to me at his age), and my mom hasn't said anything so... who knows?
  3. Ah! Of course! You know, oddly enough, I hadn't thought of the first point you made. What Evangelical said: "An interesting topic might be to discover the extent to which these two, religiosity and altuism, have been mistakenly used as surrogates for strength of values." This would be closest to what I was looking to investigate, and would make a fantastic research question. Thank you My mom gets Time, I'll see if she can dig that one up for me. (On an unrelated note, is there a way to quote and respond to multiple people within one post, so I don't have to make multiple posts?)
  4. Right, to clarify, my intention would be basically that last sentence there. Most psychology tends to lump everyone in together, in the search for an average to write about. Another thing on my mind while writing this is my experience with some counselors, and the experience of another poster with a counselor- basically if you don't fit the norm, many counselors will encourage you to forget about your set of values, because they are obviously wrong and / or hurtful.
  5. Ah... sorry. While I was writing that I was thinking of another post that included a link to a Department of Altruism at a university. Bad stuff. I mean altruism as sacrifice in order to help another. But I just now went and looked in a dictionary, and that seems to be the actual definition. So nevermind. I'll rephrase that: Objectivists are not altruistic.
  6. I'm a grad student in psychology, and my faculty advisor is old, tenured and doesn't have many friends in the department, which means he is open to me doing non-traditional research. First a little background. In psychology, both research and counseling, a few ideas are held to be self-evident, or at least "just how it is." Among these are: 1. Altruism leads to happiness. The more you help people, the happier you are. 2. Faith in any god or gods leads to happiness, for one or more of the following reasons: Faith gives a person guidence in his or her life- being given rules to live by by God or religious leaders keeps people from being anxious about the decisions they make. Being part of a religious group gives a person an instant social group of like-minded people, and having lots of social support makes people happier. Additionally, being part of a faith group and being altruistic generally go hand-in-hand. (I don't mean that religious people are more altruistic. I mean that religious organizations often do community-oriented things, such as soup kitchens, building houses, mission trips etc.) 3. Another assumption that is made (though the research is not as supportive of this point) is that people in collectivist cultures (think Japan, for example) are generally happier than people from indiviualistic cultures (think America). Also, within the same culture, people who score higher on collectivism scales (people who place more importance on their social group or family) tend to be happier. (The validity of dividing cultures into a Indiviualism / Collectivism dicotomy is begining to be questioned, but the terms are still used quite frequently.) Now, as it turns out, for many, many people, these assumptions hold true (though the findings on the third one are shakier and more complicated). People who are involved in community service often score higher on happiness or satisfaction scales. People who go to church, or at least believe in some god, also tend to report higher happiness / contentment with their lives. Rogers, the first Humanism counselor (1950's or so) often told people who were depressed to go help other people, perform some kind of community service, and many of his clients experienced a lifting of their depression. My question to you is this- Would it be worth studying happiness in Objectivists? After poking around on these forums, it struck me that people who have been living by Objectivism for a long time (I mean, not someone who is going through the growing pains of realizing they haven't thought at all during thier life) seem to be very happy people. Content. Confident in their abilities to interact with the world, and secure in the knowledge that they are great humans. ALSO: Not altruistic in the way the word is used in psychology. ALSO: Aethists. ALSO: The strongest individualists in existence. Unless I am off the mark in some major way, this would make for a very interesting paper. (That probably wouldn't be published, but who knows...) What are your thoughts on this? Do you think that Objectivists are the happiest people around? (I want to make it clear that I view you all as human beings, not just potential data points. It would be easy to take this all in the wrong way, so please please don't think that I want to poke you all with a stick to see what you do.)
  7. All right, so it has been a few days, and I am not completely content yet, but I have got my blanking-out under control and am actually ABLE to stand back a little and think. I have lost my unshakable belief in God. What I haven't lost is the habit of having a belief. What is left is that fear everyone talks about. Fear of losing something, fear of the unknown, superstitious fear of God's retribution, etc. The same way that I'm afraid of the dark shortly after watching a horror movie. That being said, the feeling of forcing a blank-out out of existence makes me want to hunt down all my other 'blanks' and toss them out on their ears, too. For example: Yesterday I had to meet with the president of a student club I am running (or trying to run). She is a particularly difficult person because as President, she is doing absolutely nothing, and additionally is on a power trip and is interfering with other people doing anything useful. I was going to meet with her so that she could tell me to stop doing her job. Now, the club members are preparing to vote in a new President, which she is unaware of, so I needed to keep myself under control and my mouth shut. So, on the way to talk with her, my habit of asking God's help/guidence/whatever through a difficult situation kicked in, but! I was able to stop myself, and realize that it was very much up to me to determine how I handled the situation. It was fantastic! What is likely obvious to most of the posters on this forum, and something I know in my head, is that when a person is given control (even the illusion of control) of any situation, they are more likely to succeed. That is what this was. I'm in control of myself, something I have always known, but this darn blank in my head was keeping me from using that knowledge. So anyway, once again I appreciate the little push you all gave me to start thinking.
  8. Ahaha! I would, but I think my reaction might be somewhat unique. Since Marx didn't singlehandedly destroy his whole movement when he had the manifest printed...
  9. Thanks both of you. I'll try to keep in mind that he IS a youngish teen. I'll see about getting him that essay- As a side note I don't think he has actually read any communist materials. I had my own wanna-be commie phase that lasted about 6 months and was stopped abruptly when I read Marx's Communist Manifesto, ironically enough. Everyone always says "It looks so good on paper," but it doesn't- it looks incredibly stupid on paper. But at any rate, thanks for your comments.
  10. My brother Asa is almost 14, and very bright. Unfortunately, for a father he has a man who could play James Taggart in a movie without having to act. My mom and step-dad are fairly reasonable people, but their influence on my brother is paltry compared to my dad's influence (for many reasons). My dad was physically abusive in the past (until I started telling community members and nearly ruined his reputation), but for some reason still has 1/3 custody of my brother, so has plenty of time to indoctrinate him with backwards thinking. When I visited home last, Asa and I had an argument regarding communism- both the general philosophy of it and the actual political implentation of it. Like most young Communisists, he hadn't thought very carefully about it, but wouldn't budge very far on his positions- he figured I was just being mean, or I didn't know what I was talking about, or I just wouldn't listen to what he was saying... This is just one conversation among various other behavioral things- he is losing the sense that he should think for himself, or that he has to take responsibility for some things, etc. Asa would not be inclined to read any of Rand's non-fiction, and I can't give him Atlas Shrugged or the Fountainhead because of the sex involved (I know what he talks about to his friends, but my mom would FREAK out). My mom and step-dad are also a bit suspicious of this whole Objectivism thing anyhow, and will object if I start sending him things by Ayn Rand. (My mom thought Rand had some sort of connections with the KKK.) Knowing that I am no expert on Objectivism, how do I avert this potential disaster? I would point him to these forums, but he can only use the internet when my mom is in the same room with him. Thanks for any input- he has gone from a pretty fun kid to insufferable over about a year.
  11. First I want to thank everyone- I am touched that you would be as supportive and thoughtful of a complete stranger. I'd also like to add that the people who make the religious cartoon pamphlets would have a field day with you guys. (I mean that in a complimentary way, those pamphlets always seemed screwy to me.) At any rate, I thought a lot about what you all said, about the blanking-out and what not, and didn't sleep much last night. When I woke up I had the very odd sensation of being absolutely alone, yet absolutely whole. If that makes any sense. I felt like I had been cut off from something, but rather than losing something, I felt like I had regained somthing. (I wish I was better at explaining.) As I woke up more, and during the day so far, that feeling has dissolved into something that feels uncomfortably like panic. I do have a fear of being alone- I do actually have some deep-seated beliefs regarding the absence of God (and I use beliefs intentionally and with its proper meaning). But I felt it this morning, and I very much want to stop this blanking stuff. So I appreciate everyone's input... I'll pick away at this blank until it is gone. [edit added a word]
  12. Yes exactly! The first time through (I haven't reread the speech yet, just thinking about it) I thought the blanking he spoke of was intentional ignoring of something, not an involuntary response... You know what- It is very like the SEP (sombody elses problem) invisibility shield from Hitch Hiker's Guide- no matter how hard I try, I can't look at it. Ahhh... not to compare literary and philisophical genius with silly entertainment... I'll re-read that speech tomorrow. (edited for clarity)
  13. I appreciate your replies. The belief = habit idea had crossed my mind, as well as God = my imagination/someTHING else. The bit about allowing even one contradiction as being a blanking-out, too. For whatever reason it is very helpful to hear other people say it though. As I think about it, I can't even think in my head what I am typing on the screen... which doesn't make much sense actually. What I mean, is I can say/type the words: "My belief is a habit, which I have enoyed very much, that I can see is empty of reason, a habit that gives me a feeling identical to the alternative of dropping the habit and embracing reason... I am pretty sure that when I ask for guidence I am seeking guidence from myself, that when I pray thankfulness that I am thanking myself, that when I ask for something from God it is with the certainty that I myself am going to have to achieve it, that when I pray for forgiveness it is a waste of my time because I often already know what to do to fix whatever I have screwed up. There is NO reason for me to believe in God past a habit I have for a long time." I can say all that, but when I try to actually think it, it is as if my brains are sliding around a locked box. (I don't mean literally... ) Honestly I am having a hard time even concentrating on words I just typed. This is an awful feeling. But I do appreciate your replies. I think they help because it doesn't require so much effort to read them as it does to actually generate the thoughts.
  14. After skimming about ten pages of search function threads, I am pretty sure I won't be repeating anything too terribly. I'm also pretty sure I am within the forum rules on this post. I'll take corrections on either point. One of the biggest difficulties I am having recently is my love for Ayn Rand and for her writings... combined with my lifelong faith in God. I use "difficulties" a little loosely, to mean troubling, or pestering, rather than earthshaking-crisis-creator. However, I have been wanting to write this all out and get some responses from people. I need some rational, objective (little "o" intentional) takes on this particular difficulty. Reading other responses to Christians who come to these boards, I am impressed by the professionalism (for lack of a better word) that is maintained. (e.g. I didn't see any "OMG Stoopid Christian! You are sooo lacking in reason!!") Disclaimers: 1. I want to make clear that I am not any sort of expert on Rand, having read only Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead thouroughly, and perusing some of her other writings. So I may be missing some major point in that regard. 2. I am not in any way promoting Christianity, nor am I trying to combine Christian and Objective philisophies in any way. I realize naming myself a Christian is going to make me somewhat unpopular, so I will explain what I mean when I say I am a Christian (this is the long part, somewhat biographical, but it illustrates why At.Shrug. and The Fountainhead swept me off my feet to such an extent). I was raised in a "Christian" environment, where my grandfather chose his church based on the quality of the choir, and my father and I routinely made fun of hymns with lines in them such as: "And seeing God, the angels all fell on their faces" and "They took my savior and they nailed him to a tree" (that last with a fast bouncy rhythm). From the get-go, I was enamored with the idea that there was some friendly man in the sky somewhere that was assigning angels to watch over me, and that my prayers would be answered (in some mysterious way that I, a mere human, would never understand). I took it much more seriously than my family. Then I hit the ripe old age of 10. I started paying attention. There was something going on, but I couldn't quite put my finger on it. Then I went through the required teen age where all adults are dumb, and I discovered that many things I had been told were questionable, or just plain incorrect, and went through a brief Pagan wannabeGoth stage, since it seemed to be the logical oppisite of Christianity. What I found there was so stunningly similar to my first religion, in that most of the thing was a farce, was a way for a few people to exert power over many, was full of know-nothings who just needed someone else to speak for them, that I lost interest eventually. I was still attending a Methodist church during this time. I enjoyed the singing, the rightousness accompanied by putting dollars in the plate, the prayer, the sermons... the works. The Pastor was a brilliant man, a fantastic speaker, and to this day one of the most Christian people I have ever known. (Christian = Lives by the actual tenets of Christ; ie loving, tolerent, patient, etc.) Most of my wiggling doubts I pushed aside. By my last year of high school, I realized that something was obviously wrong with me. The begining of the end of my attendence at church services came when I realized that I prayed wrong. When I prayed in church, my eyes remained open, focused upwards, past the vaulted ceilings. I presented mySelf to God along with my prayer. I felt no shame, or humbleness. There was no sense of groveling. I thought that God should be proud of what a fine human he had made, and that to prostrate myself would rob him of a chance to view his greatest work. I was not "Godfearing". One Sunday it struck me that even though this is how I had prayed since I was six, it was abnormal. Everyone around me looked sad, or sleepy, or in some great pain. My second major revelation came after a service in which Milo the Pastor gave a sermon regarding homosexuality. He had attended the national Methodist meeting, where among other things, members had voted to continue veiwing homosexuality as wrong by a comfortable 2/3 majority. He was very angry. He denounced his own organization for being a mob of hypocrites, spoke to the stupidity of veiwing another human as Less because of their privite lives, and said that he and his congregation would not bar anyone from God on the grounds of sexuality. It was a spirited sermon, and I agreed with nearly every bit of it. On the way out the door, where it was custom for members of the congregation to chat for a few moments with Milo, I listened to a doctor from the community comment on his sermon. She was actually one of my doctors, and I respected her very much. But she said, "Milo, I so appreciate your sermon today. I just had no idea what to think about this topic, and it is very comforting to me that I now know what I should think." This was one of those times in my life that I think my jaw actually dropped. I thought- "she has just handed over her brain to someone, because she was afraid to think for herself! And this, an intellegent woman!" I haven't attended a service since. My "last straw" so to speak, was more recent. I was presenting on Kierkegaard, a deeply religious philosopher, in a psychology class made up of mostly anti-religious people. (Not friendly aetheists! These people would have happily persecuted me if I let on I actually believed in this stuff.) I love to speak to groups, and I happened to love my assigned philosopher. So I spoke for about 15 minutes on Kierkegaard's writing, his life, and God. This was, for all intents and purposes, a religious sermon taking place in a classroom. I made it that way on purpose, because I wanted to fight with people (I do SO love a good classroom brawl! ). But for 15 minutes, my classmates listened, and laughed (in a good way), and nodded their heads, and applauded at the end of my presentation. No arguments, no questions. Their faces mirrored my love of Kierkegaard and God. It was one of the most terrifying experiences of my life. Terrifying, because... it was so easy. I didn't browbeat, I didn't yell, I just talked, and mob mentality (or something!) took over. I am sure that I didn't actually convert anyone, but my god, it was such a leap from their previous attitudes to what I saw in their faces after I was finished. I was actively perverting their free will, and they allowed it. I couldn't bring myself to touch so-called Organized Religion with a ten-foot pole. I couldn't be a part of that system anymore. It made me feel dirty. So what I was left with was a individualized, unshakable spirituality. And then- Atlas Shrugged! Wow! So I went and found a copy of The Fountainhead. And I read Ayn Rand's discussion of the words Exaultation, Worship, Reverence, and Sacred, contained in the introduction to the 25th anniversary edition. She states that "Just as religion has preempted the field of ethics, turning morality against man, so it has usurped the highest moral concepts of our language, placing them outside this earth and beyond man's reach." In the context of religion, these words debase man, are emotions to be experienced on one's knees. During the book, these words are used in context of Roark's buildings, and Roark is described as a religious man, in his own way. I feel these emotions when I pray (God) and when I drive into Seattle (skyscrapers), in precisely the same manner. Also in the Fountainhead, Toohey's "collection of souls" struck home with me as well, in a different manner. This is what I glimpsed after Milo's sermon, and in my classroom. Perusing other similar topics, I found the following post: "Here are the main reasons why they [Christians] cling to the belief in God: They believe that without God, 1. Life is meaningless. 2. The universe is incomprehensible. 3. There is no morality by which we can live. 4. We can never be certain of the truth." I was tempted to reject these four statements out of hand, but I thought carefully about them, and still reject them. I do not believe those statements to be true. In the context of the quoted post, I should not be clinging to the belief in God. So why do I still believe? I don't believe the Bible was handed down, hot off God's presses, to the various authors of its books. The Bible is a man-made text. Period. Books were revised and removed (to what extent depends on your tendency to conspiracy theory), and a good deal of the stories can more easily be taken as metaphors than historical events. There was some point in history (Council of Nicea? I can't remember whether that is even close) where a vote was taken to decide whether Jesus would be portrayed as a prophet of God or The Son of God. So what am I left with? When I call myself a Christian, the statement is based on the fact that I believe in something similar to the Christian God, not because I go to church, or because I think I am too weak to exist on my own. I know all the arguments that God offers no proof- and I don't believe anymore that he does leave it, just in mysterious ways that little humans can't see. I should not have faith in God. In another thread, I found also the following post: "It is not so much the rejection of faith that is important, but rather the promotion of reason." I may be mistaken, but it has been my impression that many of the posters on this forum do in fact reject faith as an antithesis to reason (which honestly, I can't argue with). Does Objectivism require a rejection of religion? Is there room anywhere for faith, or is faith seen as a form of deception? Am I mistaking something else as my reverence of God? As I type this all out, it is ocurring to me that it all actually bothers me quite a bit. As a response to this post, please don't tell me that there is no proof, that I am just afraid to think for myself, etc... the responses that would make sense if I had come in here and compared the Bible to Atlas Shrugged (or something). I really think I have a pretty good grasp on reality, and on the general ideas contained in Objectivism. So what is happening here? (I know this was a long post- thank you for taking the time to read it and respond in anyway.)
  15. This is sort of in reply to all... Regarding intellegence- this is one of those constructs that psychologists and others wrestle with, because it is VERY difficult to define. If you think of people you know, it is easy to say "So-and-so is an incredibly bright person" or "So-and-so is not the sharpest knife in the drawer" but it gets to be a tangled mess when you try to quantify intellegence. The Standford-Binet Intellegence Quotient (the "IQ" test most people refer to) is actually a pretty darn good test, IF you come from the culture for which it was written, AND if you are taking a recent version. All published tests, including IQ tests, are rewritten every once in a while, and are thouroughly checked for 'goodness' (item-by-item and as a whole, and compared to tests that are similar and ones that are different, among other things). Given that we have seen a great deal of change in societal values as far as gender and race equity etc. go, it should come as no surprise that test-makers make an effort to make very fair tests. So if I took the most recent version of the IQ test, and also took the test from 20 years ago, it wouldn't be a leap to predict that I would get two different scores. If we knew Rand's IQ, the most useful thing we could do with it is say "Well, yes, she was brilliant and the IQ test picked up on it," or "Well, she was brilliant and obviously the IQ test measured her incorrectly." A score on any test is only one part in the overall picture of a human. Except when IQ is being used officially, people like to use the scores in whichever way it suits them. For example, if it was found that Rand's IQ tested at 100 (precisely average), then her detractors would flaunt that number as "proof" that she wasn't anything special. If she scored a 170 (well into the "genius" range), her detractors would point fingers at the "huge inconsistancies" in standardized testing. Also what comes to mind is one of the things which Galt said in his radio address (I don't have my copy, so not a direct quote!)- That your intellegence matters less than your relentless use of your mind. (edited to add content)
  16. Brilliant. You hit the nail on the head here. Most of modern counseling therapy focuses on giving people just enough help to put them on their feet, and make sure they are able to continue helping themselves after they discontinue the counseling. Giving them tools, as you said. I think therapy would benefit from some sort of application of this philosophy, but alas, most people in psychology, particularly counselors are collectivist socialists... And in reply to the poll, I was suicidal on and off in high school, then got to college and met my future (and now current) fiance, who had basically been an Objectivist since he was old enough to realize he was an individual. Recently he found Ayn Rand and I stole his copy of Atlas Shrugged... basically Rand put words to many of the thoughts he had. I became MUCH happier after meeting him, and now feel great joy on a regular basis. (edited to add content)
  17. Can't seem to make the quote function work right, so: "It annoys the heck out of me. We DO make widgets. We make SUPERLATIVE widgets. We'd be no use to anyone if we didn't." That's awesome! There are regular blood donation runs on my campus by the local blood center, and I donate if I am feeling well and if my iron is high enough. The reason I donate might be a little round-a-bout... I figure I might need blood one of these days, and I hope it is there for me. I know that I am not directly affecting my future by donating blood now, but it would make me uncomfortable to expect my lost blood to be replenished unless I had already done something "in return". What makes me crazy though, is there is a strong feeling (sometimes people come right out and say it) that if you don't donate blood when you are able to, you are a morally bad person. Fear of needles? Screw that. Faint when you donate blood? Suck it up. So I wear a long sleeve shirt on the day I donate and refuse to wear the I Donated Blood sticker. Your own blood is your own to decide what to do with, and shouldn't be pressured out of you any more than money.
  18. First disclaimer: I am not well read or any sort of expert on Rand's writings. That being said. I loved Atlas Shrugged. I don't think I would have bothered looking any farther into Rand's writings if I had not read that first. My two cents.
  19. My field is psychology, and perhaps I am in a very good department, because it isn't as bad as all that... however, this bit is right on: "Psychologists consider ethics to be totally subjective and believe that what appear to be moral conflicts are due mostly to poor communication. It follows, according to them, that all cultures are morally equal and therefore no one has the right to condemn anyone or hold any firm moral views. (Being “judgmental” is a cardinal sin in contemporary psychology.) There are some exceptions to this; for example, most psychologists consider it appropriate to love altruism and collectivism and to hate capitalism, individualism and America." There are a couple of exceptions in the faculty, but it stuns me that professors who are normally quite rational, very intelligent scientists allow their brains to dribble out their ears when it comes to things like altruism and individualism.
  20. Greetings, I'm introducing myself in the proper place, I hope... My fiancee began reading Atlas Shrugged, recommended it to me, after which he couldn't get his hands on it until recently... And such was my real introduction to Rand. I had heard her name before, primarily used by the sort of feminists one finds on university campuses that have forgotten all about equality and are bent on domination, and like to use quotes out of context... So I was blown away by Atlas Shrugged. Emily Dickenson said something to the effect of... She knew she was reading good poetry when she felt like the top of her head was lifting off. I have to say, there were times when I had to put Atlas Sh. down because I was worried that my head would leave me permanantly. I grew up in a looter family... Reading Rand is like reading direct quotes from my childhood. (As the most recent example... My cousin recently removed my grandfather's computer from my grandfather's house because my cousin's girlfriend "needed it more... " This was without my Grumpus's permission, of course.) I hear people going on about how the conversations in Rand's fiction writing are so false and contrived, but I swear I have heard my dad recite directly from the looter / rotter / etc. speeches. It is uncanny. So aside from my spouse-to-be, no one I know has anything good to say about Rand or her philosophy, and I have been a bit lonely. I have gone through some serious life changes since I moved away from home and met my fiancee, and Atlas Shrugged finalized some changes, and crystalized some half-formed thoughts... but I like to talk about things like that with other similarly-minded people. Who are few and far between on my campus. I have been looking for something like these forums for about a month now, and stumbled in here somewhat by accident (thank you Google sidebar ads). So at any rate, here I am, and I look forward to many good conversations.
×
×
  • Create New...